Vagueness, Logic and Ontology

Hyde, Dominic

doi:10.4324/9781315548524

Cited by 19 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Jaśkowski defends this idea by suggesting that assertions have a different meaning in his system; they are all prefixed with the implicit operator 'In accordance with the opinion of at least one participant in this discourse'. Whatever the merits of this as an account of assertion in discourse itself, adapting Jaśkowski's explanation to handle vagueness (following Jaśkowski's own suggestion, as in Hyde (1997Hyde ( , 2008) doesn't appear to add anything to the intuitive case for the view, except insofar as it suggests the appropriate formal treatment of the idea that borderline cases are glutty and not gappy. Subvaluationism is left, as it were, clinging to the symmetry with supervaluationism as its best argument.…”

Section: Supervaluationism and Subvaluationismmentioning

confidence: 89%

Voting and vagueness

Chase

2015

Synthese

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How to handle vagueness? One way is to introduce the machinery of acceptable sharpenings, and reinterpret truth as truth-in-all-sharpenings (supervaluationism) or truth-in-some-sharpenings (subvaluationism). A major selling point has been the conservativism of the resulting systems with respect to classical theoremhood and inference. Supervaluationism and subvaluationism possess interesting formal symmetries, a fact that has been used to argue for the subvaluationist approach. However, the philosophical motivation behind each is a different matter. Subvaluationism comes with a standard story (due to Stanislaw Jaśkowski) that is difficult to sign up to. In this paper, I make use of a variant of Putnam's well-known idea of linguistic deference, and some results in voting theory, to answer this criticism of subvaluationism. The acceptability intuitions of each member of a linguistic community amount to their voting for one or more acceptable sharpenings, with truth then characterised as truth-in-a-(contextually-determined)-sufficiency-of-sharpenings. This produces a family of logical systems that are close relations of subvaluationism, share its conservatism results, yet have stronger philosophical foundations in the workings of externalist content.

show abstract

Section: Supervaluationism and Subvaluationismmentioning

confidence: 89%

Voting and vagueness

Chase

2015

Synthese

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Technical terms and jargon, for instance low‐pressure system and showers , are commonly used in weather communication. They are possibly used because they are precise, a characteristic of technical language (Hyde, ). Non‐experts might learn the terms because they are interested in weather or because the terms are important for them to know, and so they look them up.…”

Section: Precise Technical Language or Experience‐based Everyday Langmentioning

confidence: 99%

A dialogue‐based weather forecast: adapting language to end‐users to improve communication

Sivle

Aamodt²

2019

Weather

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Is fine weather actually fine weather to everyone? Professional end–users are likely to benefit from the use of technical language when discussing meteorology, whereas non–experts are likely to find everyday language more suited to their needs. To reduce the number of possible interpretations of everyday language when used to describe weather, its usage should be co– developed with end–users and combined with graphical/numerical information.

show abstract

“…For excellent, though somewhat advanced, discussions of 'indeterminacy' and 'vagueness', see Hyde (2008), Keefe and Smith (1997), Smith (2008), Williamson (1994), and the bibliographies therein. For excellent, though somewhat advanced, discussions of 'indeterminacy' and 'vagueness', see Hyde (2008), Keefe and Smith (1997), Smith (2008), Williamson (1994), and the bibliographies therein.…”

Section: Summary Looking Ahead and Further Readingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Logic: The Basics

Beall¹,

Logan²

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vagueness, Logic and Ontology

Cited by 19 publications

References 2 publications

Voting and vagueness

Voting and vagueness

A dialogue‐based weather forecast: adapting language to end‐users to improve communication

Logic: The Basics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About